Police from other cities everywhere tonight

Anyone know why police from Oakland and piedmont are all over Livermore tonight?

DUI Avoid program

This is the time of year that LPD stops everyone for minor things that never get enforced the rest of the year. This is their excuse to stop as many people as possible fpr DUI. It's a big contest and there are awards to the PD that wins each year.

I'm all for keeping drunks off the road but not like this.

Bob wrote:

This is the time of year that LPD stops everyone for minor things that never get enforced the rest of the year. This is their excuse to stop as many people as possible fpr DUI. It's a big contest and there are awards to the PD that wins each year.
I'm all for keeping drunks off the road but not like this.

Why does it bother you that the LPD are doing their job? Damned if they do and damned if they don't!

Bob wrote:

This is the time of year that LPD stops everyone for minor things that never get enforced the rest of the year. This is their excuse to stop as many people as possible fpr DUI. It's a big contest and there are awards to the PD that wins each year.

I'm all for keeping drunks off the road but not like this.

Well Bob, what method would YOU suggest with your vast law enforcement experience? You may want to discuss your views with the family of the teenager killed two weeks ago at Murrieta & Portola due to his driving under the influence of alcohol. I'm sure they would like to hear your views on DUI enforcement.

I don't think you guys are understanding Bob correctly. They are stopping people for minor things so they can do random DUI checks. I'm all for keeping drunks off the road and safety as well but most of the people they pull over aren't doing anything that endangers anyone. It borders on harassment. Pulling someone over for things like driving with a broken reflector light isn't going to save anyone. It's just a way to get more money out of us.
Whenever there's something potentially dangerous going on in Livermore I don't see the cops doing anything about it. We had an unmarked van with people checking on our neighbors doors last week and it took them an hour to get here. It seems like they don't care about anything that won't get them money.

I guess at least they won't be sitting in the church parking lot on Arroyo down the street from the station for hours on end talking to each other which I've seen them do quite a lot.

Livermore mom wrote:

Anyone know why police from Oakland and piedmont are all over Livermore tonight?

LOL You might of seen Oakland cops but if you saw a Piedmont cop in Livermore who is patrolling Piedmont? One Piedmont cop is 1/2 of the police force in Piedmont.

Nicole wrote:

I don't think you guys are understanding Bob correctly. They are stopping people for minor things so they can do random DUI checks. I'm all for keeping drunks off the road and safety as well but most of the people they pull over aren't doing anything that endangers anyone. It borders on harassment. Pulling someone over for things like driving with a broken reflector light isn't going to save anyone. It's just a way to get more money out of us.
Whenever there's something potentially dangerous going on in Livermore I don't see the cops doing anything about it. We had an unmarked van with people checking on our neighbors doors last week and it took them an hour to get here. It seems like they don't care about anything that won't get them money.
I guess at least they won't be sitting in the church parking lot on Arroyo down the street from the station for hours on end talking to each other which I've seen them do quite a lot.

Come on Nicole. You know we have a better police department then that. You should be more upset that we have to pay them around $100,000 a year for life in a pension after they turn 50 and that is with a 3% pay raise every year after only working 25 years, and to top it off they did not have any money taken from that fat paycheck to pay for this scam as long as they have been working in Livermore. How cool is that?
Now back to the response time it took the police to check on that van. Something had to go wrong if it took a hour to see a cop. I have never had a problem with how fast they show up. I feel they do a great job in response time. Now if they wanted to cut the drunk driving rate down by 80% all they would have to do is put the check points on the freeways. I dont know about anyone else but if I have a small buzz going I always feel safe once I get on a freeway.

Nicole wrote:

I don't think you guys are understanding Bob correctly. They are stopping people for minor things so they can do random DUI checks. I'm all for keeping drunks off the road and safety as well but most of the people they pull over aren't doing anything that endangers anyone. It borders on harassment. Pulling someone over for things like driving with a broken reflector light isn't going to save anyone. It's just a way to get more money out of us.
Whenever there's something potentially dangerous going on in Livermore I don't see the cops doing anything about it. We had an unmarked van with people checking on our neighbors doors last week and it took them an hour to get here. It seems like they don't care about anything that won't get them money.
I guess at least they won't be sitting in the church parking lot on Arroyo down the street from the station for hours on end talking to each other which I've seen them do quite a lot.

Nicole, so let me get this straight, you'd rather the drunk with the broken tail light who is driving alright at the moment, be allowed to continue driving and possibly crash into you killing you or a family member? Or maybe they just run over some poor kid in a crosswalk.....I just want to get what your saying....these scenarios are ok?

And if you want to talk about response time, why don't you ask your Chief of Police or your mayor why the police department is working with 15 less officers than it should be. Why are the fire departments completely staffed, yet the crime stoppers/enforcers are a victim of "the economy". Go ahead and ask, I did and got nowhere....no gang unit, no narcotics unit....hell, everybody should ask - it's our city, it's our investment, it's our families safety.

Hey Mike...I know you are bitter about the pension situation. However at least they put in 30 years before they get it, why don't you bitch about our elected government officials who only put in one term and get the equivalent of their salaries as a pension for the rest of their lives. Those elected officials don't put their lives at risk, they don't work on holidays, are tucked in bed at night, don't miss their kids graduations, birthday parties. Then we can compare to the private sector, they don't get bonuses or stock options, their isn't much room for promotions.

I don't know....I don't want to do their (police) job, I feel after 30 years of service they should get a good retirement. I also found out in my research that if they die before they retire, their spouse does NOT receive their retirement...you won't find that in the private sector either. Another stat I read (sorry can't remember where but it was sobering and I remembered it), is that the average life span after a police officer retires is 5 to 7 years (due to the stress of the job).

Nicole wrote:

I don't think you guys are understanding Bob correctly. They are stopping people for minor things so they can do random DUI checks. I'm all for keeping drunks off the road and safety as well but most of the people they pull over aren't doing anything that endangers anyone. It borders on harassment. Pulling someone over for things like driving with a broken reflector light isn't going to save anyone. It's just a way to get more money out of us.
Whenever there's something potentially dangerous going on in Livermore I don't see the cops doing anything about it. We had an unmarked van with people checking on our neighbors doors last week and it took them an hour to get here. It seems like they don't care about anything that won't get them money.
I guess at least they won't be sitting in the church parking lot on Arroyo down the street from the station for hours on end talking to each other which I've seen them do quite a lot.

C'mon now...Harassment? Really? Since when are cops only allowed to pull people over if they are endangering someone? How about breaking a law! No matter how small it seems to be to you, it is still a law. I bet you're one of those people who still text and drive and don't see anything wrong with it...

Noballsblogger wrote:

Hey Mike...I know you are bitter about the pension situation. However at least they put in 30 years before they get it, why don't you bitch about our elected government officials who only put in one term and get the equivalent of their salaries as a pension for the rest of their lives. Those elected officials don't put their lives at risk, they don't work on holidays, are tucked in bed at night, don't miss their kids graduations, birthday parties. Then we can compare to the private sector, they don't get bonuses or stock options, their isn't much room for promotions.

Which elected officials are you referring to? Federal?
BTW, in the private sector stock options are worthless, mostly. But for the tiny fraction that are actually worth something, the workers usually have sacrificed cash in exchange for these options.

Noballsblogger wrote:

I don't know....I don't want to do their (police) job, I feel after 30 years of service they should get a good retirement.

They can but they should be required to pay for it themselves like everyone else. And maybe the answer is mandatory retirement after 10 or 15 years of service.

Noballsblogger wrote:

I also found out in my research that if they die before they retire, their spouse does NOT receive their retirement...you won't find that in the private sector either.

Ooh, "research". Wow that sounds official. So you must have some sources, some "citations" to offer up as evidence of this?

By law, in most plans and jurisdictions, if the member was not vested..then a beneficiary will receive a lump sum "refund" of the decedents pension balance. If vested, they might more likely get a survivors benefit, which could also possibly be paid as a lump sun. Also, to protect against the financial impacts of early death is why people buy life insurance.

Noballsblogger wrote:

Another stat I read (sorry can't remember where but it was sobering and I remembered it), is that the average life span after a police officer retires is 5 to 7 years (due to the stress of the job).

Unfortunately what you read, and remembered, and are now propagating is just a myth. Calpers has all the data on life expectancies, because as you would expect for any retirement system, they have a full actuarial practice. It reveals that public safety workers live as longer, and sometimes longer than the general population. And, because they retire at younger ages than the general population, they are much less likely to die within any given number of years, post-retirement. http://davisvanguard.org/index.php...

Noballsblogger wrote:

<quoted text>
Nicole, so let me get this straight, you'd rather the drunk with the broken tail light who is driving alright at the moment, be allowed to continue driving and possibly crash into you killing you or a family member? Or maybe they just run over some poor kid in a crosswalk.....I just want to get what your saying....these scenarios are ok?
And if you want to talk about response time, why don't you ask your Chief of Police or your mayor why the police department is working with 15 less officers than it should be. Why are the fire departments completely staffed, yet the crime stoppers/enforcers are a victim of "the economy". Go ahead and ask, I did and got nowhere....no gang unit, no narcotics unit....hell, everybody should ask - it's our city, it's our investment, it's our families safety.

By your reasoning they should just pull anyone over for no reason at all in case someone who is driving completely fine is drunk.

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>C'mon now...Harassment? Really? Since when are cops only allowed to pull people over if they are endangering someone? How about breaking a law! No matter how small it seems to be to you, it is still a law. I bet you're one of those people who still text and drive and don't see anything wrong with it...

So if you got pulled over for every single time you drove 1mph over the speed limit you'd be fine with that

Also Citizen, I have the phone off when I drive. It makes me angry when I see people fooling around and endangering people while they drive. But like I said before, driving 1mph over is also 'breaking the law so no matter how small it may seem to you, it is still a law' you should be pulled over for because you are 'endangering' everyone else driving. According to your post anyway. Same thing if you have a cracked reflector light, God forbid.

LEO wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Bob, what method would YOU suggest with your vast law enforcement experience? You may want to discuss your views with the family of the teenager killed two weeks ago at Murrieta & Portola due to his driving under the influence of alcohol. I'm sure they would like to hear your views on DUI enforcement.

So Mr. Law Enforcement Officer (leo) you think it's ok to stop people for trumped up violations? You pull people over for something hanging from a mirror, but rather than walk up and explain that as the reason for the stop, you first ask "have you been drinking". At least play out the original PC before you drop that line.

Again, I'm all for getting drunk drivers off the road, but use a little good PC and observe the bad driving, weaving etc. Or is that just too difficult.

Bonus!

Click to reveal

Bob wrote:

<quoted text>So Mr. Law Enforcement Officer (leo) you think it's ok to stop people for trumped up violations? You pull people over for something hanging from a mirror, but rather than walk up and explain that as the reason for the stop, you first ask "have you been drinking". At least play out the original PC before you drop that line.

Again, I'm all for getting drunk drivers off the road, but use a little good PC and observe the bad driving, weaving etc. Or is that just too difficult.

Well Bob, I would suggest you research the subject matter a little more thoroughly. The police can detain you for any infraction, misdemeanor or felony violation. If you do not want to be detained, don't commit any of the above and you won't have a problem. Yes, and if you weave will driving, or display any other objective symptoms of driving while impaired, your nice local police officer will introduce themselves and ensure you are not out driving under the influence and being a hazard for everyone else. Sorry you don't like the rules Bob, but get over it Bob. Like it or not, lives are being saved by aggressive DUI enforcement, Bob. Take a look at the MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) website and you may change your mind, Bob. Oh, and have a nice day Bob.

LEO wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Bob, I would suggest you research the subject matter a little more thoroughly. The police can detain you for any infraction, misdemeanor or felony violation. If you do not want to be detained, don't commit any of the above and you won't have a problem. Yes, and if you weave will driving, or display any other objective symptoms of driving while impaired, your nice local police officer will introduce themselves and ensure you are not out driving under the influence and being a hazard for everyone else. Sorry you don't like the rules Bob, but get over it Bob. Like it or not, lives are being saved by aggressive DUI enforcement, Bob. Take a look at the MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) website and you may change your mind, Bob. Oh, and have a nice day Bob.

You are correct. Just unethical to make up crap to stop innocent people. But, i guess you're not above that. Have fun in I.A. Tough guy!

Nicole wrote:

<quoted text>
So if you got pulled over for every single time you drove 1mph over the speed limit you'd be fine with that

Is 1mph over the speed limit breaking the law? Of course it is. Pay attention to your speed when you drive and you don't have anything to worry about.

Bob wrote:

<quoted text>You are correct. Just unethical to make up crap to stop innocent people. But, i guess you're not above that. Have fun in I.A. Tough guy!

What kind of made up stuff are you referring to Bob?